SAURAV GOEL,DEOGARH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 44/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 July 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to substantiate its claim before lower authorities. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal granted one more opportunity to the assessee to represent its case before the AO. This was subject to a cost of Rs. 2,000/- payable to the Income Tax Bar Association.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2018-2019. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without providing a sufficient opportunity of being heard. The assessee requested the matter be restored to the AO for a fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

IT Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

Hearing: 15/07/2025Pronounced: 15/07/2025

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 29.11.2024 for assessment year 2018-2019. 2. It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate its claim. 3. In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).

4. We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee could not substantiate its claim by providing relevant documents neither before the ld. CIT(A) in appellate proceedings nor before the ld. AO in assessment proceedings. However, the ld. AR has made a request before the Bench that if the assessee is given one more opportunity to represent its case before the ld. AO, the assessee could be able to provide all the details before the ld. Assessing Officer to substantiate its claim. This being so, in the interest of justice, we grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the ld. AO by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) shall be payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Bar Association, ITAT Campus, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack- 753014, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the AO positively.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →